Newsdeck
US judge upholds Trump’s $83.3 million defamation loss, rejects new trial
NEW YORK, April 25 (Reuters) - A federal judge on Thursday rejected Donald Trump's bid to throw out an $83.3 million defamation verdict in favor of the writer E. Jean Carroll, who said the former U.S. president defamed her after she accused him of raping her decades ago.
By Jonathan Stempel
U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan denied Trump’s requests for a new trial, or to have the former Elle magazine advice columnist’s case thrown out altogether.
He also dismissed arguments that the jury’s award to Carroll following Trump’s “malicious and unceasing attacks” was too high, and that errors at the civil trial tainted the verdict.
Trump is appealing the verdict, and plans to appeal Thursday’s decision.
“We categorically disagree with Judge Kaplan’s decision,” his lawyer Alina Habba said in a statement. “It ignores long-standing constitutional principles and is a prime example of the lawfare raging across this country.”
Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer for Carroll, said she was not surprised by the decision, and said the $83.3 million award was “entirely reasonable.” She is not related to the judge.
Trump is the Republican presidential candidate in the 2024 election, and also a defendant in four criminal cases, including an ongoing hush money trial.
In the Jan. 26 verdict, jurors agreed with Carroll that Trump defamed her in June 2019 by denying that he had raped her in the mid-1990s in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in Manhattan.
Jurors awarded Carroll $18.3 million of compensatory damages for emotional and reputational harm, plus $65 million of punitive damages.
Trump’s lawyers argued that the judge instructed jurors improperly about the burden of proof needed to show malice, and erred in striking testimony about his state of mind.
According to the lawyers, Trump’s testimony that “I just wanted to defend myself, my family, and frankly, the presidency” was relevant to whether he had acted maliciously, and that excluding it “all but assured” a big punitive damages award.
But the judge said Trump’s attacks had been seen by more than 100 million people, and that Trump defamed Carroll with out-of-court statements even during the trial.
He also said Trump “put his hatred and disdain on full display” in the courtroom, including by muttering that the proceedings were a “witch hunt” and “con job,” and walking out as Carroll’s lawyer made her closing argument.
“On this exceptional record, the punitive damages evidence passes constitutional muster,” Judge Kaplan wrote.
Last May, a different jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $5 million over an October 2022 denial of Carroll’s accusations, finding he had defamed and sexually abused her. Trump is also appealing that verdict.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Jonathan Oatis)
“In the Jan. 26 verdict, jurors agreed with Carroll that Trump defamed her in June 2019 by denying that he had raped her in the mid-1990s in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in Manhattan.”
There is something I don’t quite understand here🤔
Maybe it’s how the criminal justice system works in the US of A.
Was Trump ever found guilty of that rape?
If yes, why is he not in prison?
If no, why is he being punished for denying the accusation?
Or is it the way he denied it that is the issue here?
If a person accuses you of raping them, without opening a case against you, you either defend yourself in the same court of public opinion where they(the accuser) placed the matter or you can go to court to sue them… In fact you can do both.
Now he is the one who is being sued for defending himself against a rape allegation.
It also seems that they want to convict him of rape without charging him of one.
“Last May, a different jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $5 million over an October 2022 denial of Carroll’s accusations, finding he had defamed and sexually abused her. Trump is also appealing that verdict.”
A person accuses you of rape
You deny it
They then to court to sue you for denying the accusation
They don’t bring the rape case itself
But the denial of it
Then the jury finds in their favour
They find that you defamed the accuser by denying her accusation(an accusation not yet proven)
It’s crazy!
From what I understand this was not a criminal case, rather a civil one (anything but) seeking payment for reputational damage. There are no criminal charges in that case, but of course the nature of the incident was brought up and discussed at length. Apparently the jury settled at ‘sexual abuse’ rather than ‘rape’ as New York has a fairly archaic definition of rape. So yes, had this trial happened 30 years ago (within the statute of limitations) he might just have ended up in prison.
I thought murder and rape falls outside the statute of limitation.
I have not given the case more than a glance, but this is my understanding. Someone please correct any errors: The statute of limitations ran out and she was not able to lodge a criminal case which would have resulted in the incarceration you mention. She was able to lodge a civil case and he was indeed found guilty of rape (or sexual assault). The guilty verdict in a civil case comes with financial damages rather than imprisonment. He had to pay about $5m. Then, after that guilty verdict, he continued to defame her. This resulted in a separate case and he was once again found guilty, this time for a much larger amount than in the first case. (They are even considering another defamation case because the man just cannot stop himself from defaming her).
The statute of limitation applied even to rape, crazy!!!
Did Trump appeal the $5 million fine(together with the verdict)?
Paying it would have looked like an admission of guilty, not only of the ‘sexual assault’
It’s District Judge in NYC, political!
So disappointed in American democracy, where it took 4 years to deal with Trumps crimes.
Now, the “master narcissist” is turning everything into a “political persecution” where his blind followers are going to have endless rallies about how he has been delayed “the presidency he deserves”.